Bartlett School Board still struggling with phone system upgrade [10/18/2003]

Two bids rejected last week for $18k project

"Can you hear me now?" may be the catch phrase for a while longer at Josiah Bartlett Elementary School as the school board continues to struggle to upgrade the failing phone system. School board members rejected two bids last week for a telecommunications consultant, because they came at over a third of the total $18,000 budgeted. The board voted to authorize SAU 9 Administrative Services Director Jim Hill to put out request for proposals for consultants after encountering a problem at its June meeting.In June only one of five bids met the full specifications for a new telephone system so the school board voted 4-1 to open the entire process again and this time seek a telecommunications consultant to write up a request for proposal.Board member Frank Moffatt along with School Superintendent Carl Nelson and Hill attempted to convey to board members Vicki Harlow, Nancee Caughey, Maureen Westrick, who has since moved out of the district (Henry Villaume was appointed to fill out the remainder of her term last week) and David Lennon that "the integrity of the bidding" process was being compromised by this action. Hill explained that all the contractors received the same information and had the opportunity to follow the bid process, but only Brooks Communication of Chatham met the full requirements of the board. The company's bid was for $16,875.Other bids that did not meet board specification were from York Telephone, of York, Maine, $8,668 (their handsets were less than required); CommPros, of Canton, Mass., $8,995 (the bid was not sealed and marked as required); Lakeside Security, of Freedom, $11,790 (their handsets were less than required); and Just Results, of Bedford, $16,954 (missing attendant console). Voters at annual school district meeting in March appropriated up to $18,500 for the purchase of a new phone system."There was controversy around the bid specs," Caughey said. "We wanted it to be clean from the start and why we sought bids from the consultants."Hill disputed claims that the bid process was brand specific as opposed to based on performance specifications. "We just gave a general overview for what we needed for a telephone set," he said. "There is nothing proprietary about this. We met with Joe (Voci, school principal), Shirley (Hamlin, administrative assistant) and Earl (Medeiros, maintenance director) and showed them what we came up with and took their input... It wasn't too narrow (a process). We had bids from people come in with phone sets half the size of what we were looking for.""We only really had one bid in the end," Harlow said, last week. "A Bartlett taxpayer also bid on the project and his company willing to offer a five year warranty while the other company didn't... The bid was on its way to the SAU 9 Office when the person delivering stopped at A.D. Davis where accidentally a cup of coffee fell on the bid. They gave him another envelop and he took it to the SAU in time, but it wasn't licked sealed. It was just a set of fluky, freaky things. I wasn't willing for a lack of sputum on an envelop to put the burden on the taxpayers.""From our office," Nelson said, "if it doesn't meet the bid specs, it's off the table."Moffatt stood by his June vote. "If there were no one who met the bid specs then I'd say go ahead and open it back up again; if there were some improprieties then I'd say go ahead and open it again," he said. "We had someone meet the specs while others didn't -- that's the way it goes. We have a very strong board specs policy and we need to stick to it to maintain the integrity of the process."Harlow felt the board had an obligation financially to rebid the contract. "It would seem like we're asking the town to spend 40 percent more because a contractor didn't lick an envelope. We got taken to task over a grill last year and that was only a couple hundred dollars. For some reason Gene Chandler and the other selectmen keep popping into my head. I think it's complicated and bogged down and we need to start again."Hill thought going back to bid might not be the best move. "We have a competitive process with sealed proposals," he said. "There was no collusion, no nothing all the bids were opened at noon and the public was free to be there. Now anyone can come in and see this price, including the contractor who didn't sign and seal their bid."The board authorized Hill to put out a request for proposal for a telecommunications consultant. The board reviewed the pair last week."Did we have any idea these bids would represent a third of our budget," Harlow asked. "Jim and I thought it would be around $6,000," Moffat said.Voci didn't think it was wise for the board to invest that sort of money in a consultant. "The community gave us $18,000 to purchase a phone system and we're going to spend $6,000 for a consultant, it doesn't make sense.""We're not going to spend a third of the money to certify the specs," Lennon said. "Couldn't we just dust off the last set of specs and rebid?"The problem with that," Nelson said, "is you've already had one company put its cards on the table.""If we vote no (for a consultant) where are we," Harlow said.Moffatt suggested that a couple of board members form a subcommittee to review the original specifications with Hill. He was asked to served on it, but declined. "I'm very biased," he said. "I'm not happy with this process at all." Lennon and Villaume agreed to serve on the subcommittee and will review bid specs with Hill and Voci and report back at the board's November meeting. When the board decides on what specs its looking for, Hill will send out a request for proposal and then turn the bids over to the board for the ultimate decision, which probably won't happen before December.Once a contract is ultimately awarded it will take approximately a month, according to Nelson, to install the system."All we're trying to get was the best value for the best money," Lennon said. "We're just trying to do the right thing."